Fox News' Hill claimed Obama's reaction to Novak's thinly sourced column means he "could have something to hide"
In his November 17 nationally syndicated column, Robert D. Novak wrote that "[a]gents of Sen. Hillary [Rodham] Clinton [D-NY] are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the party's presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama [D-IL], but has decided not to use it." Offering no clear sourcing, Novak continued: "The nature of the alleged scandal was not disclosed." On the November 19 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, Novak claimed that his source was "a well-known Democrat" who "was told by an agent of the Clinton campaign ... about the alleged scandal, but acknowledged that he personally has no idea whether the alleged "scandalous information" even exists, saying: "[W]hether there is any such scandalous information, I don't know." Later that day, on the November 19 edition of Fox News' America's Pulse, host E.D. Hill said that Novak "said that team Hillary had some, quote, 'scandalous information' on her rival, Barack Obama, but wasn't releasing it -- yet." Hill went on to introduce a report by Fox News congressional correspondent Major Garrett by saying that Obama's "reaction" to Novak's column "might leave some with the impression that he might, perhaps, could have something to hide," failing to note that Novak himself admitted that he has no personal knowledge of any information Obama would want to "hide."
Novak cited no sources in his original column. On Fox & Friends, he acknowledged that his purported "source" was not involved in the Clinton campaign, referring to that "source" as "a well-known Democrat, but neutral so far" who was "told by an agent of the Clinton campaign" about the "scandalous information." He said he "then checked with another source who is neutral and said he had heard the same thing from Clinton -- Clinton people."
Novak's November 17 column bears similarities to the January 17 InsightMag.com article alleging that Clinton's campaign conducted a "background check" into "Mr. Obama's Muslim past," which revealed that Obama "spent at least four years in a so-called Madrassa, or Muslim seminary, in Indonesia." The InsightMag.com article -- which, like Novak's column, simultaneously attacked the Clinton and Obama campaigns -- cited only anonymous "[s]ources close to the background check," and its allegation that Obama was educated in a "madrassa" was quickly and thoroughly debunked.
On November 19, Sam Stein, political reporter for The Huffington Post, wrote of Novak's Fox & Friends appearance:
So Novak was not privy to the dirt itself, nor did he talk to Clinton's people. Rather, he heard it from someone who had heard it from someone else. Another secondary source, Novak went on to say, claimed to have heard the same thing. Fact-checking = completed.
For the record, in the original column, Novak suggested he had more personal knowledge of that rumor-mongering. "Agents of Sen. Hillary Clinton," the piece began, "are spreading the word in Democratic circles that she has scandalous information about her principal opponent for the party's presidential nomination..." There was no mention of a source.
Stein also noted that Novak's November 17 column "has been ridiculed" by other media figures: reporter-blogger Steve Benen called it "shamelessly unethical," while Time columnist Joe Klein called the column "garbage" and suggested Novak "has simply abandoned all pretense of being a journalist."
From the November 19 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:
STEVE DOOCY (co-host): Thanks for joining us on this Monday morning. Is Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign hiding damaging dirt about Barack Obama? A recent column got quite a reaction, even from Obama himself.
BRIAN KILMEADE (co-host): We now have an exclusive interview with the man who wrote that article, syndicated columnist and Fox News contributor Robert Novak. Bob, welcome back. Again, controversy surrounding -- surrounding one of your columns -- which is good -- using one of your sources. What did you write, and what caused such a reaction?
NOVAK: I wrote that the Clinton campaign had injected into the Democratic political bloodstream a report that they had derogatory, scandalous information about Barack Obama, but were not going to put it out because it would hurt the Democratic Party and probably hurt Senator Clinton if that information was out. But they thought my source, who is a well-known Democrat, but neutral so far, but they thought he should know about this information. I then checked with another source who is neutral and said he had heard the same thing from Clinton -- Clinton people.
This is -- this is very similar to the kind of tricks that Richard Nixon used to pull, where he would say, "I know some very bad information about the Communist-supporting [1972 Democratic presidential candidate] George McGovern, but I can't put that out because it wouldn't be right, but I'm just too good of a guy." Now, what -- whether there is any such scandalous information, I don't know. But what I know is I'm confident in my sources, who I trust, were told this by Clinton people that there was such information out.
DOOCY: OK, and going to the source, you refer to that person as an agent of Hillary Clinton, and you said not aligned so far. Does that mean -- it's obviously not somebody from the campaign, but just somebody who's a big Democrat in Democrat [sic] circles.
NOVAK: Now, let's get it straight that the pers -- my source is a big Democrat, not -- who is neutral right now, but was told by an agent of the Clinton campaign --
DOOCY: OK.
NOVAK: -- who was involved in the campaign about the alleged scandal.
DOOCY: So somebody, Bob -- somebody from the campaign has spoken to Democrats, saying she's got this stuff on Barack Obama, but she's not going to spread it around because --
NOVAK: Exactly. That's what the story is. Yes.
From the November 19 edition of Fox News' America's Pulse:
HILL: There is trouble on the campaign trail after a report surfaced in Robert Novak's column that said that team Hillary had some, quote, "scandalous information" on her rival, Barack Obama, but wasn't releasing it -- yet. Obama is calling on Clinton to come clean about it, but her team is denying the charge, saying Obama is falling victim to a right-wing trick.
Major Garrett is live in Knoxville, Iowa. Major, Obama's impression might leave some -- reaction, that is, might leave some with the impression that he might, perhaps, could have something to hide. I mean, if you're coming out that strongly instead of just sort of blowing it off and saying, "What is she talking about?" is that a risk?
GARRETT: It's a risk that the Obama campaign very much considered, E.D., and I want to tell you, I've got a horrible satellite connection, so if I can't hear your next question, please forgive me, and you'll just have to move on. But on that question, the Obama campaign said -- told me it had two choices. It could either respond aggressively to this charge, or let it lie. Or basically dare the Clinton campaign to release whatever it is that they had -- that's three choices. They decided to be aggressive because they thought, here in Iowa, the better posture for them would be to challenge Clinton directly, put this to rest, and even if that left the impression they might have something to hide, that was worth the risk, because they wanted to assert themselves as an aggressive Democratic campaign willing to take on any and all challengers -- Hillary Clinton, the future Republican nominee if Barack Obama gets the nomination for the Democratic Party. All those things they wanted to lay down.
No Hill the real issue is Novaks lie and latest attempt to divide the Democratic party, to create something probably from Ailes and Rove to Novak. Novak makes me sick .
I'll second that too Doris.....
Only in a corrupt corporate run media can a sleeze like Novak still be allowed to write an opinion and be given a forum to toss even more crap on the TV on FOX Noise.....
Novak should be rotting in prison for helping expose an under-cover CIA agent!
Though this dirty old liar never had much in the way of credibility to begin with..... so it makes sense that he would be found only on FOX......
First of all, Novak outed a FORMER undercover CIA agent, which was NOT a crime.
Second, I don't know if his story is based on anything or not. But even he suggests that there may be no real scandalous information about Obama. The only thing he is sure of is that the Clinton camp are spreading the rumor that they know something. He thinks the rumor is probably false, though. That doesn't make him a liar if he has a source.
I need to fglex your brain a little. She became a former CIA agent the moment Novaksrevelation hit the newstands. He is lucky to be living in the United States.He could have used his god given talents in a more poroductive manner.
Traitors all, they were determined to keep the lie of WMD up with weapons of Mass Distraction.
Take an awful lot of prescription tranquilizers to put America back to sleep though and since we don't have the proper healthcare, I pity the stupid bastards still trying to pull the wool over the American publics eyes now, no matter how much their gossipmongers try to raise their ratings on tv.
GossipTvnews.com=Cnn's Wolf Blitzer, Fox Noise's Bill Oreilly an company right wing hacks, and even though I like the tone set by Mathews and Olbermann, Mathews tends to be a little encouragment to the Clinton Team and touts like Joe Scarlboro, to get to the truth and put them on the spot without letting them get away with the stupifying of the American patirons who watch the advertisements on the stations. I think that gives the public a disservice, not like Lou or Cafferty.
You are LYING AGAIN. Novak exposed the identity of, at the time of her exposure, a CURRENT undercover agent.
Then why has neither Novak nor Richard Armitage been charged with a crime?
Are you not the same poster who was using some of the most vile homophobic language I have ever read on here? now you are lying about Valerie Wilson. Shameful.
Doris
He is the same individual.
This is one of the most frustrating things about arguing with hard rightwingers. They just believe what the hivemind tells them. We disabuse and completely debunk one of these precious talking points they slink away then when the subject comes up later they just come in and make the same old long debunked argument with no hint of shame.
Lets do it AGAIN. The law about exposing undercover agents has more criteria for it being a crime than exposing the agent. For instance they had to KNOW that agent was undercover, the exposure had to be deliberate. Since Scooter LIED to the grand jury Fitz felt there were elements of the crime he couldnt charge. Which in no way means no crime was committed anymore than the fact no one was charged in the St Valentines day massacre meant those guys shot to death in the garage lived long happy lives. Whether or not their exposure constituted a crime however is IRRELEVANT to the FACT that Plame WAS undercover at the time of her exposure. The CIA declassified and put into the Congressional record her employment RECORD and it showed with no rational ability to further argue this that she WAS undercover at the time of her exposure.
Hivemind! Ha! Leave it to Solon to come up with a witty and truthful categorization of far-right propagandists and their followers! You’re one of the reasons why I enjoy reading the arguments here because you’re so full of fire and wit!
Thank you Preston I appreciate that.
Because Bush and company has replaced the rule of law with the Patriot Act, a well sounding new rule of law.
Yeah...
Just like how Lee Harvey Oswald shot a FORMER President.
LOL. Great post dude. Former... LOL. That's rich.
Hey DogRun,
You have every right in the world to come in here and post whatever floats your boat.....
You even have a right to write opinions that make you seem an ass or ignorant..... this post does that this time around
However, if you want to be taken seriously in anything you might ever say in here.....
Could you at least post your opinion using some actual FACTS...... and not FOX Noise or Bush regime Kool-Aid
Valerie Plame WAS a working agent, i.e; an on the job CIA COVERT OP........
Working on WMD's..... or lack there of in...... IRAQ no less!
Not only should Novak be in prison but so should Rove, Cheney, and Scooter and quite possibly, Bush for exposing the cover of an undercover agent!
She had not been on an undercover mission since 1997. Unless you can produce a source saying otherwise.
There would only have been a crime if it happened within 5 years.
I guess the CIA telling us that she was indeed a covert agent doesn't mean anything to you? Or is the Director of the CIA just a big liar as well?
Get over it. Plame was a covert agent, who traveled under cover to work on matters of WMD, and nuclear proliferation.
here's your source. while working at cia headquarters, she took temporary trips overseas, sometimes under "true name and sometimes using an alias", "but always using cover". so says the cia summary of her employment.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/
The fact you have no idea what you are talking about is crystal clear. To continue to regurgitate this hivemind talking point at THIS late date shows you dont know ANYTHING except what the Limborg has told you. That you are woefully uninformed and think TALKING points are all that exist. Well HERE read it and weep, try to make it at least a month before you come back in here and try this BS.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/
Newly released unclassified document details CIA employment
WASHINGTON - An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame's employment history at the spy agency, disclosed for the first time today in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was "covert" when her name became public in July 2003.
Undercover travelThe unclassified summary of Plame's employment with the CIA at the time that syndicated columnist Robert Novak published her name on July 14, 2003 says, "Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for who the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States."
Plame worked as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations and was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) in January 2002 at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.
The employment history indicates that while she was assigned to CPD, Plame, "engaged in temporary duty travel overseas on official business." The report says, "she traveled at least seven times to more than ten times." When overseas Plame traveled undercover, "sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias -- but always using cover -- whether official or non-official (NOC) -- with no ostensible relationship to the CIA."
First of all, Novak outed a FORMER undercover CIA agent, which was NOT a crime.
Second, I don't know if his story is based on anything or not. But even he suggests that there may be no real scandalous information about Obama. The only thing he is sure of is that the Clinton camp are spreading the rumor that they know something. He thinks the rumor is probably false, though. That doesn't make him a liar if he has a source.
Firsto of all, you are wrong. Valertie Plame WAS an undercover agent, and Novaks broke the law. He should be in prison right now.
Second of all, if his story is based on nothing at all, then there is no story. Robert No-Facts strikes again.
Dog,
First of all, Novak outed anUNDERCOVER CIA agent, she was not outed until he wrote about it, and remember that exposing covert operatives is something that George H. W. Bush called "treason." Are you ingnoring the fact that she was covert on purpose, honestly forgetful to the point of being ridiculous, or just drunk on the kool-aid?
has no idea what covert means. just reading something handed to him, with no knowledge to make an intelligent decision, just like Novak the traitor.
DogRun is a complete imbecile and his lack of knowledge is totally apparent. he has no idea about anything in the real of security, and probably does not even know how to recite the pledge of allegiance, much less understand it. I salute all the silent warriors, the true patriots.
She was covert. The head of the CIA said so. The judge said so. The prosecutor presented copious evidence that it was so. But it doesn't matter how many times you're confronted with the facts, does it?
"Major, Obama's impression might leave some -- reaction, that is, might leave some with the impression that he might, perhaps, could have something to hide. "
Or it could leave some with the impression that Barack isn't going to lay back and be a push over while these smears take on a life of their own.
Or it could leave some with the impression that Barack isn't going to lay back and be a push over while these smears take on a life of their own.
Exactly!
As a Republican/Conservative who is strongly considering Obama, should he win the Democratic nomination, I was very impressed that he stood up & let everyone know that he won't put up with sleazy politics.
None of us know where Novak's info came from. But it wouldn't shock me if the Hillary camp is behind it. Actually it wouldn't shock me if Rove were behind it.
Either way, it's a shame this is the way politics has been played for almost 2 decades now...
Dirty politics are not something that has taken place just in the last 2 decades. It has been going on since the founding of this country. It really is nothing new, but I did like how Obama took it head on, addressed it, and sort of moved on from there.
Count the hedges in Hill's comment (might, could, perhaps), this leads one to posit that even Hill knows she is full of it. What utter dishonesty from the people at Fox. Why do they hate America?
Come on people we know the only reason that fox does this is because they have made a secret deal with rudy. That is why the lawsuit is there.
You win the grand prize, ahiddensaint764. Fox News Channel-and Fox Prez Roger Ailes-are in Rudy's pocket. These news stories about Hillary and Barack are purely hit pieces.
I have no doubt that Judith Regan's multi-million lawsuit will be settle out of court, because News Corporation doesn't want the public to know the truth about their Giuliani alliance. These fools Novack and Hannity are in on the smear campaign too.
Fox News will interview Thompson, Huckabee and Romney as a cover, but they really support Giuliani because of Ailes' past business and personal relationships with Giuliani. Fox News and their talking heads push GOP propaganda.
Now here comes the fun part. If you want to know who the Fox News clowns favorite candidates are, visit http://www.fec.gov and type in the names of your favorite GOP talking head. Keep this web site handy for future use.
I believe he is now going by Rudi, not Rudy.
I believe he is now going by Rudi, not Rudy.
Especially while he's cross-dressing....
Is the i dotted with a little circle with 9/11 inside it?
Is the i dotted with a little circle with 9/11 inside it?
Yes. And he signs it with the blood of those who died in NYC on 9/11 because of his failed leadership.
Now do you see how this works, how a non-issue suddenly becomes an issue?
Justice and Truth in the USA - Reasonable conjecture edition:
There has been a rumor that the Los Angeles Times has been holding back on reporting a sex scandal which involves one of the Democrat Party candidates. Now this is purely conjecture, but I think the hypothesis is pretty sound -
I think that it's possible that some 'plumbers' from the HRC campaign might have broken into the office of the LA Times and found the scandal report and are now prepared to use it. Note, while I do not have any evidence - yet - it is true that Hillary has been described as a Nixon in a dress.
I rest my case.
"I rest my case." - Justytruthy
And you should rest it...it needs a nice long nap.
It seems you cannot even get your bonehead unsupported/unsupportable links right--since that partular piece of effluvia is titled "Nixon in a pant suit".
The reference to the "dress" was a reader response on that page.
Once again, I rest my case.
"Once again, I rest my case." - Truthyjusty
That little sucker just won't stay down. Have you considered holding a pillow over its face?
thanks for making a fool of yourself again. you're just making conjecture upon conjecture.
and your link claims that it's about a democratic party candidate. but the author makes it clear that he is not naming which party. more of your false "facts"?
It WAS a sex scandal, rigtht? Well, I mean, who else could it be?
The mormon? I sure don't think so. And everyone already knows about Rudy and Fred. So could it be Ron Paul? Yeah, like that's going to happen. The hillbilly from Hope?
Nope - it's either Hill or Obama. I think that is just a safe assumption.
"It WAS a sex scandal, rigtht? Well, I mean, who else could it be?"
Because Republicans NEVER get caught up in sex scandals, right? Now I'm convinced that you're just a parody of a braindead winghole.
think what you want. but you claimed that link had to do with it being a democratic candidate. the author said he was not specifying.
No it isnt a safe assumption. Everyone knows SOME things about Rudy. There could be sex scandals about him that would make a drag queen fient in embarassment. Fred Thompson could easily have some serious skeletons we dont know ANYTHING other than there is this rumor...which means we dont know ANYTHING. So that means you are not just a moron but also a rumormonger lets add pathetic to that list.
Exactly Solon. To expand on this, my take is that we are starting to see a shift in conservative attacks purely based on poll numbers. Recent polling in Iowa shows Obama has crept into the lead. It's just more of a nuisanced approach from FOX and its minions. Follow the leader......attack the leader. I would submit as evidence that you don't see any "stories" about Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, etc..... I would submit that the jokers on the right are much more afraid of Obama or Edwards than Clinton. My guess would be because either is much more dangerous in their ability to garner the independent swing vote. Clinton is so much of a polarizing figure, I just don't believe she can win. The right knows this and as such we are seeing an uptick in personal crap stories towards Obama. We seen it with Edwards and the haircut and trial lawyer stuff earlier. Divide and conquer. Many here will disagree with me on this, but by nominating Hillary we will be giving the white house to the GOP.
You could be correct. It may be the Republicans behind all this...
OR it could be Hillary. She can read the poll numbers too.
IF she fears Obama might snatch her pre-ordained nomination from her, do you seriously believe she wouldn't stoop to dirty tricks?
Not at this point in the campaign...why should she? Now for the Repugs, anytime is fair game. And once again, WHAT SCANDAL?
Jeter, do you believe Novak is telling the truth? And if so, about WHAT?
Not at this point in the campaign...why should she?
Prince, I believe I already touched on that when I wrote: IF she fears Obama might snatch her pre-ordained nomination from her
Obama has taken a lead in the polls over her in Iowa. Should he win there, there's a great chance that momentum will help him win in N.H. Hillary is not stupid. Slowing Obama down is a necessity.
WHAT SCANDAL?
Damned if I know. According to Novak it's Hill's "agents" suggesting there is one to hide.
do you believe Novak is telling the truth? And if so, about WHAT?
I believe someone gave him the info. Do you actually think he made that part up out of thin air? Hell I know you guys think The Prince Of Darkness eats Democratic babies...but get serious here.
What we don't know is who whispered in his ear, or which camp the rumors of some sort of alleged scandal originated from.
Jeter what's is up with you? Your starting to "sound" shrill and uber cynical in all of your posts about HRC. Given the history of the tactics used by some of the individuals on the right (see John McCain's illegitimate bi-racial baby, History of all things Karl Rove & Novak) , there is far more evidence pointing in that direction. I would have to say that I think your letting your dislike of the "She-Devil" cloud your judgment.
I wish we could just cut the crap and focus on the issues.... not this ridiculous charade of a campaign. We all deserve better.
Shrill? Mmmm sorry MHK I don't think my posts come off that way at all.
Cynical? Ok, when it comes to Hills, I plead guilty.
The Right certainly has indulged in the dirty tricks/sleaze department, I won't argue with that, but are you sure that you're not being just a tad naive about the Left? They aren't angels[ Especially the Clintons]. Politicians from both sides of the aisle play games.
I'm just disappointed with the Democrats. Here you have three great candidates in Biden, Obama or Dodd, but you have all been brainwashed into believing only Hillary can capture the Holy Grail aka Oval Office.
And quite frankly I think that way of thinking may backfire. Nominate Hillary, & you might find yourself with yet another Republican President.
And it might be Rudy. Yuck.
J,
You know the rules. When criticizing Democrats you come off as "shrill" and "cynical" because there can't possibly be policy or issue disagreements, it must be your hysterical personal dislike, get over it.
However, when criticizing Republicans it's completely warranted and any insulting invective is perfectly acceptable, issues don't matter.
Now, continue........
I hear ya Tommy.
I even went back & re-read my posts to see if they had a "shrill" tone to them. They didn't. In fact, if I must say so myself, they were quite civil, reasonable...and even quite pleasant ;-)
I forget sometimes that anything negative written here about Dem/Libs, & especially Hillary gets the natives in a bit of a defensive huff.
Perhaps MHK was projecting Hillary's "shrill" tone onto me?
Well, as Clams pointed out yesterday, you and I are just hypocritical idiots anyway who only name-call.......I am crushed, aren't you?
Pearl...um I mean Clams said that about us?
Gee golly wow, I didn't even have any contact with that silly little mollusk yesterday. Imagine him talking about me behind my back...it's just so not like him ;-)
Tommy, I'd suggest we wear Clams distain like a Badge of Honor, but he's such a inferior adversary, it would be worthless.
J, It was on the "Wash. Post called Giuliani.........." posted here Sunday. Priceless! HAHA
Oh that was funny!
I see Clam's mini-me WZwriter joined in. That guy is a bigger joke than Clams.
I usually avoid Clams, he's not worth my time, but I think I'll go seek out the little mollusk & get him steamed ;-)
Anything is possible. I do feel that she is a calculating person with her eye on the prize. Time will tell.
Aliens COULD be behind this. That statement really doesnt mean much.
"It WAS a sex scandal, right? Well, I mean, who else could it be?" - JustUsTruthy
If this so-called scandal involves young boys or gay bathroom sex, then you have a nearly limitless supply of Republican candidates to choose from.
Now, see? That was easy. Next baseless wingnut supposition, please.
"It WAS a sex scandal, rigtht? Well, I mean, who else could it be? "
No, it was a rumor, about a possibility, concerning an allegation.
It's also, as has been pointed out, misdirection.
"And everyone already knows about Rudy and Fred."
Yikes, I didn't even hear about that hookup.Please don't give us any details.
People do not be fooled by this crimesforlies person. The real story is again Rudy. Do not let them side track from this.
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/11/13/213557/97
Judith Regan Alleges Fox Told Her to Lie About Bernie to Protect Rudy
Maybe now this story will gain some traction in the media. It's been way too lenient on the connection between Bernie Kerik and Rudy Guiliani. There were headlines for one day and then no one asked the tough questions, the ones about what Rudy knew about Bernie and his alleged ties to mob associates and a company with alleged ties to mob associates and when he knew it.
The New York Times reports that publisher and former Fox News talk show host Judith Regan has filed a 70 page lawsuit against News Corp and Harper Collins in state court in Manhattan over her abrupt firing during the firestorm over her planned publication of O.J. Simpson's book about how he might have killed Nicole Brown Simpson. The text of the lawsuit is here.(pdf)
Regan alleges in the lawsuit that a Fox executive told her to lie to federal investigators about her relationship with Bernie Kerik in order to protect Rudy Giuliani. She says another Fox exec told her not to turn over relevant documents.
We understand that when Rudy was advised of this problem concerning the lawsuit, his exact words were "9 11, 9 11, 9 11". XOF NEWS
Judith Regan:
hi-lites of her "career": (wikipedia)
...while working as a secretary at Harvard University, Regan answered a newspaper ad for a reporter for The National Enquirer and got the job. In the early 1980s, Regan relocated to New York City.
In 2006, Regan announced that she would publish O.J. Simpson's book, If I Did It, issuing an eight-page defense of the deal in which she claimed to be a battered wife and claimed that she felt the "spirit" of the victims in the room with her as she spoke to Simpson
On December 15, 2006 Regan was fired from HarperCollins, allegedly over anti-Semitic comments
--------------------------------
Yeah, Rudy must be just soooo scared!
more of your fakery. your "anti semitic" link implies that it has something to do with regan. it doesn't. it's simply discusses anti semitism. regan isn't mentioned.
TRHUTY, Once again you speak truthiness...Regan worked for the National Enquirer and ended up at Fox. Just like the rest of thier "journalism team."
One has to wonder if she was concerned about the damage to her journalistic reputation she suffered by going from the National Enquirer to Fox News.
ha ha good one
---"Note, while I do not have any evidence - yet... "---
Uh-huh.
There are WMD in Iraq, too.
---"it is true that Hillary has been described as a Nixon in a dress. "---
I can't believe it. An anonymous right-wing commenter made a derogatory comment about Hillary Clinton.
Stunning.
I think that Rupert Murdoch is just upset because Hillary looks better in a dress and PANTS than his Rudi does..although TRUTHY will find some facts to dispute this.
Now ain't THAT the truth! :-)
You dont have a case you have a rumor. Those of us with normal IQs can tell the difference.
This is in keeping with the usual themes running through all Fox "News" stories:
1 -- Republicans good.
2 -- Democrats bad.
Accusations that Hillary Clinton didn't leave a restaurant tip? Fox "News" says she's a skinflint who doesn't understand the plight of average working people.
Discover that Clinton left a $100 tip on a $157 bill, a 63 percent tip when it's typical to tip 15 to 20 percent? A "typical liberal" who can't control her spending.
The one thing you can count on from Fox "News" is that all "news" stories and "fair and balanced" commentary will show Democrats in the worst possible light, no matter how far from facts, logic and common sense its "journalists" have to stray.
ANd he mightpossibly could be an alien from Zeta Reticuli. Novak has as much evidnece of the former as the latter.
I have just heard from an agent of darkness that Novak married Dick Morris in a secret ceremony in Las Vegas. Rumour has it that Morris is still broken hearted because Bill Clinton will not leave Hillary. When I called Novak to confirm this report he drooled on the phone and passed out.
Are 'AGENTS' of the Clinton campaign spreading these rumors? Do they have 'SCANDALOUS' information on Obama that they are not going to release? YES OR NO?
The Answers Are: NO! –and- NO!
Is this all a Republican Dirty Trick? YES !!
For me this is 99.99% just the latest dirty Republican trick, intended to spark a war between the Democratic front runners. The Obama campaign appears to have detected this and backed off. - BUT …
This needs to be investigated vigorously to find out specifically which Republicans, if any, are behind this plan. Even if not found, this may cause huge damages to Republicans in general.
For me this is 99.99% just the latest dirty Republican trick, intended to spark a war between the Democratic front runners.
You may be right Sam. But I still wouldn't put it past Hillary's camp to have planted the story.
What impresses me is that Obama stepped up & let everyone know that he isn't going to allow this type of dirty politics to go without comment.
Given Novak's history and his involvement with Karl Rove I would have to say that all signs point to this story being B.S.
Unless he can come up with something more specific why would you even give him the benefit?
How are you J2...
I agree with you 100% and I was kidding about 99.99%. More like 85% because I agree that Hillary's people could possibly make a mistake like this but if Hillary found out about it, I feel she would put a stop to it.
Happy Thanksgiving! -Sam I Am-
This is a fairly poorly worded header. Hill doesn't claim Obama's response means he has something to hide. Hill supposes that such a conclusion could be arrived at by some people. Whether that's the case or not (it most certainly is the case), Hill is not saying outright that Obama's defense 'means' he necessarily has anything to hide.
That's just an old Fox News trick.
"some people' = the nitwits who watch Fox
---"Hill supposes that such a conclusion could be arrived at by some people."---
Funny how no one says who the "some" might be.
In reality, and for those who are not quite that gullible, this is an old, tried-and-true Fox News ploy that goes back years (see the documentary "Outfoxed", for instance).
Fox all but owns a patent on the "Some say/Some are saying" trick---a really cowardly way of making an accusation against someone without owning up to it.
XOF NEWS...Where Night is Day and RIGHT is Always WRONG....
SPECIAL REPORT....An agent from the White House has informed XOF NEWS Reporter, Edie Ovadahill that an unnamed Republan candidate has been have an affair with a Democratic Party member. The source will remain secret because we don't know his/her name. The problem for the Republan candidate is that his wife calls him at the worst times and e suffers from cellularinterruptus. The source indicates that this candidate has a sexual problem and their sex lasts between 9 to 11 seconds.
Sticking with XOF NEWS standards, we cannot nor will not expose this ex-Mayor.
Now doesn't the above sound as stupid as a Truthy post.
I think if you looked up "RUMORMONGER" in the dictionary (assuming it's in there, and I didn't just make that word up) I think you'd find a picture of Novak and a reference to THIS column.
I love it. His story is basically this:
SOMEONE said that SOMEONE ELSE had SOME INFORMATION. But they did not disclose what that info was.
Hey Bob - next time... Why don't you try to get an story before spreading misinformation about it?! Moron.
...get an actual story before...
I wish you could edite! :)
...get an actual story before...
I wish you could edit! :)
Mr. Novak seems to be an angry old man who is being put out to pasture by those who have used him. They are now tired of him and thought they would throw him a bone. He probably thought it was a good piece to get his name back in the News but this is his Swan Song...Novak, your own boys threw you under the bus with this old "my Source" routine.
Mr. Novak, your days have come and gone. It is now time to pay the devil his due. You will always be remembered for your terrible treatment of a CIA employee, a undercover government worker who might have been hurt in her LINE OF DUTY, the same as our military personnel. Your patriotism may also be questioned. I will always question it. That is one.
Even before Novak's disgraceful columns outing Plame, he used his journalistic talent in mostly negative ways. As he grew older, he became more and more just a hack and a shill for the Republicans in power.
His appearances on the dreadful "Crossfire" illustrated this perfectly. He just made innuendos and spewed right wing talking points shamelessly; no effort at all to get his facts right.
I'm very surprised all the "neutral" sources are so close to the "Clinton campaign". If it was indeed a NEUTRAL source/s why are they on the inside so to speak and so highly politically affiliated with the Clinton campaign that they would have that type of information to divulge to this guy?
I guess no matter how many times we warn fox of the inuendo of the campaign slinging with no journalist research on the sources of the news, they still want to be a gossip column like Jerry Springer.
America is tired of the "Disfunction Junction" that our media has become and are going to start turning it off.
I heard from an anonymous source close to the Giuliani campaign (a 'neutral' and 'credible' source) that Giuliani possesses pictures of Robert Novak, punching a baby.
If you support baby punchers, then you should read Novak's journalism. He loves to hurt small children.
Oh, and don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger. I LOVE babies!
How could Giuliani stoop so low as to smear a talentless, hack journalist like that? It's disgusting.
Also, baby punching is disgusting, and Novak should be ashamed of himself.
If she's certain or any of her team Hillary didn't do it, she should go after Novak for the lie.
Why hasn't she or Bill done so to shoot it down? Hmmm........?
Gives me a pause to how she is trying to cast doubt on the People's candidate across all parties lines, eh?
I told you once she keeps opening her mouth to dodge, and duck serious issues, with no clear answer to the solutions or change, the people will see she's just an empty slogan for the 90's where the rememberance of the later years will sink the party even further in abyss if she's nominated.
And I'm quite sure with all the wiretapping George and the Republicans put through, they are just loaded with amunition to take Clinton down even lower.
With all this going on, why risk another RethugliKlan Neo-conservative Agenda for four more years?
America can't wait for Hillary to figure out it's needs or be told what to say to get everybody snookered on their vote,.
when we said we wanted change in 2006, we had no coubts about what those changes were then and we darn sure still know what they are today, since she's voted to call a piece of the Iranian Secret police a terrorist group.
Kyl-Sleazyman?
C'mon, we know where her bread and butter issues are, she can't even have the decency to answer us truthfully, while planning to stab us in the back with an extended version of Nafta in India.
No more drama, vote for Obama! In 08, We won't wait!
I just read this article and I think that Clinton and her players are just acting immaturely and using dirty little games like these as a last resource, eventhough the election is still months off . Now, in defense of Obama, I think that this recent unknown "scoop" on Obama is completely FALSE, because they can't even come clean about their little story. These types of childish games are for five year olds not political candidates... especially those of the Democratic Party for which I am in very strong favor of.
Aside from our resident wingers, it's really striking to me how brainwashed the Obama supporters are here. Obama was bravely standing up preemptively against an attack that wasn't made, and for which he has only Novakula's word that it exists? This isn't brave, this is either stupid or an unprincipled smear of Hillary. There. I said it. Apparently all that "bringing Blue and Red together" stuff wasn't working, so cooperating with the Russert/Matthews/whoever smear of a fellow Democrat is just fine. He's a Divider, not a Uniter. Which devil did he make a pact with?
"Why hasn't she or Bill done so to shoot it down? Hmmm........?"
Well, Mr. BlueCat whatever, maybe because when somebody makes a baseless charge, you have nothing TO shoot down. All you can say is, "We have no idea what the guy is talking about. We have no such "evidence", we're not planning to use evidence we don't have, and we're not planning to not use that evidence, because it doesn't exist." Which is pretty close to what they did say, when the stupidity of Obama's team got him to respond to a proven liar.